[unholiness]

Interesting take. I saw Phillip DeFranco as more of a pioneer of that style. He really leaned into the cuts. At the time it was something no one else was doing so it was very noticeable, and he had a very crisp cadence with them where the jarring cuts were part of the presentation. It was clear his process was: Write a script, mark cuts everywhere it could make sense, go through the script repeating every phrase until you're happy with the sound, and when editing, always make the cuts where they're marked, even if it could be skipped.

The result feels something like pixel art: Clearly not the closest possible imitation of conversational speaking, but something else. A style in its own right with different considerations.

Now that it's par for the course to have jump cuts, I see them used more sloppily everywhere, where it's clear the narrator decided where to do the cuts after the fact. Cutting off the beginning or end of a phoneme, missing or repeating bits of a thought because they they liked one phrasing in recording but opted for another one in post, misordered cuts where something which moved in the background moves back to its old place, etc. Phillip's style looked lazy but it can't really be imitated with actual laziness.

These days I look back and really cringe at the substance of his show. But I still see the style as professional.